On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 5:56 PM, rachel lyra hospodar
<rachelyra at gmail.com> wrote:
> this seemed like a great temporary solution to me. i am open to other
> directions... but after all it isn't the anonymity-r-us conference, and
> the page isn't locked. just now you are asked to say who you are when
> you work on it. If that is somehow problematic for people i'd
> definitely like to hear about why.
Well there is a lot to unpack here, and I think it'd be better to talk
about it in person, but it basically breaks down to:
1) You're not actually excluding anonymity here, since anyone can
(anonymously) create a prank login.
2) But you *are* assuming that anonymity is your problem rather than
people trolling, and as a community, we spend a fair bit of time
trying to preserve anonymity online -- both as a capability (Noisetor)
and working to protect its reputation as something that isn't just a
thing that horrid horrid people do
3) Also as per NB tradition, a troll is just a friend you haven't had
a six month hair-pulling coming to agreement with (yet). Rather than
blocking that conversation, you might want to ... oh god, probably
indulge in a two week edit war with them. Still, communication is
better than exclusion.
4) Special-casing this page in particular (for some fairly mild edits,
unless i missed something) seems a bit ... weird.
tldr: there is a lot of politics and strong viewpoints attached to
preserving and defending anonymity -- just ask Eva at the event you
just plugged. It isn't uncontroversial to suggest shutting it down in
one particular case. God knows I dread even raising these points as
controversial without igniting some controversy about them.
Anyway, Casey switched on the protection for this page and i'm not
particularly excited enough on this topic enough to turn it back off.
d.
>> On 2/27/2012 4:16 PM, miloh wrote:
>> On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 3:58 PM, Casey Callendrello <c1 at caseyc.net> wrote:
>>> Fun story: the edit came from inside NB. I have seen the trolls, and
>>> they are us.
>>> --c.
>>>>>>>>> One of the edit groups came from an IP inside noisebridge (off the
>> wireless network), the other IP is from #noisebridge. Anyone could
>> find this out.
>>>> Controlling anonymous edits are not the direction to head on a wiki
>> page about an anarchistic unconference.
>>>> If there's a problem with vandalism and spam, lets talk about some
>> different strategies to deal with it tonight.
>>>>>> -rma
>> _______________________________________________
>> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
>>Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net>>https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss> _______________________________________________
> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
>Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net>https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss>